Steve Jobs the Best Paid CEO in US

Forget the $1 per year Steve Jobs got during his first year of return at Apple. According to Forbes, Steve Jobs is today the most well paid CEO in US with $116+ million for the previous year. Our Take: Apple announced recently that they sold about 743,000 machines in 2002 (their main income comes off Mac machines), so that would be an extra payment of around $155 on average for every machine a Mac user bought last year. Let’s just call it the “Jobs Tax”. 😉

About The Author

46 Comments

But how much does it really cost Apple to give Jobs >$100 million in stock options?

2003-04-05 3:02 am

Someone knows how to work the boss for a raise… Oh wait…

2003-04-05 3:04 am

mostest wellest paidedest ceo!

2003-04-05 3:05 am

It costs exactly that: $116.3 million.

It is like saying that if you give me an 100 dollar bill, how much does it cost. Well, it costs exactly that: 100 dollars.

It costs all the shareholders, because it dilutes the overall worth of the company.

Also, back in 1998 when Jobs came back in Apple and for the first year he was taking that $1 per year as a payment, he had already accepted more than $400 million in stock options in order to sell NeXT to Apple.

So yes, Jobs did some good job at Apple, but he costs way too much today. I am not sure if it is logical to keep him around with such a salary.

2003-04-05 3:14 am

“So yes, Jobs did some good job at Apple, but he costs way too much today. I am not sure if it is logical to keep him around with such a salary.”

Yeah… they should instead hire you right? Since you did turn Apple around and kept it profitable during most of your tenure as CEO. Oh, wait… you didn’t….

BTW. Apple has billions in the bank, that doesn’t mean that the shareholders get to see that money, if he was getting such a salary while Apple was bleeding money left and right probably you would have a claim. If the shareholders felt that he as diluting they shares value I am pretty sure he would be out of the door….

2003-04-05 3:17 am

Apple also bought him an expensive private jet.

This 1 dollar bullshit is pure propaganda. If any of you are impressed by that than your a total dickhead.

Smart execs make money on options and fire workers to raise stock prices.

It’s common now. Fire people which raises the stock price and profit big time.

2003-04-05 3:19 am

>Apple has billions in the bank,

Apple HAD billions in the bank. Money doesn’t stay put you know.

>if he was getting such a salary while Apple was bleeding money left and right probably you would have a claim.

Jobs did some good things when he came back onboard at Apple. But is he _really_still_ needed today to drive this company when his salary is so big? This is the real question at this point.

>If the shareholders felt that he as diluting they shares value I am pretty sure he would be out of the door….

A bit of distorted reality is all it takes…

2003-04-05 3:21 am

>>Apple also bought him an expensive private jet.

Yes, and Jobs makes an extra 2 million per year on renting the Jet Apple bought for him, back to Apple. That was on the news a few months ago…

2003-04-05 3:31 am

Steve Jobs is cool!

2003-04-05 3:38 am

I think Apple should ask for its money back.

2003-04-05 3:38 am

..within 2 years whether he’s worth what he’s paid. Companies have their ups and downs — what with the economy and the processor issues Apple is facing, it will take an extraordinary CEO to pull them through. Either he works or he doesn’t.

2003-04-05 3:41 am

“>Apple has billions in the bank, ”

>>Apple HAD billions in the bank. Money doesn’t stay put you know.”

They still do.

“>if he was getting such a salary while Apple was bleeding money left and right probably you would have a claim.

>>Apple is no longer profitable, didn’t you read?”

An unprofitable quarter doesn’t necesserally imply that Apple is bleeding money. As a matter of fact, Apple’s two non profitable quarters were fairly modest when you consider not only the economy, but also the fact that Apple has pulled profits while every single computer manufacturer has posted significant losses (asside from Dell… who has been posting modest profits)

>”Jobs did some good things when he came back onboard at Apple. But is he _really_still_ needed today to drive this company when his salary is so big? This is the real question at this point.”

We have yet to see the product of Apple’s 6 years of preperation for comeback. Its been building up until Apple can (finally) release first class hardware with its new first class OS. Steve used his skills to help recover Apple, and soon we will see those same skills in action to help build mare market share. The plan will debut and the end of this year and start materializing in 2004

” >If the shareholders felt that he as diluting they shares value I am pretty sure he would be out of the door….

>> “A bit of distorted reality is all it takes…”

Not at all considering the fact that he isn’t diluting the company’s shares. A person deserves compensation based on what he can do for a company. Remember, Steve not only brought back Apple from what many suggested was absolute death, but kept the company profitable throughout nearly all of this dificult enonomy all while staving off some formidable competition.

2003-04-05 3:43 am

>the processor issues Apple is facing

This is clearly Jobs and Apple’s fault. The fact that Motorola sh*tted on them, it only shows that Apple didn’t handle the situation right. So this alone IS one of the reasons why someone would say that Jobs didn’t do a good job on this important matter.

2003-04-05 4:15 am

I need to cobble together a PC.

I need to cobble together a PC.

Therefore I can never admit apple right now is kicking everyone’s behind on actually making a good product, thanks in large part to Stevie.

2003-04-05 4:16 am

The United States version of the Dalai Lama.

I mean he is *so* enlightened and really made computers enlightened too! Steve has devoted his entire life to bringing common computing to the common (wo)man to the joys of enlightenment through the most enlightened Operating System and colored plastic.

They say just being in the presence of Jobs brings one to enlightended states of oneness. Even his helicopter is enlightened!!

2003-04-05 4:22 am

Did anyone look at the farging table?

2002

Total Comp: 116.3

Cash: 2.3

2001

Total Comp: 43.5

Cash: 43.5

Ok… Now, does anyone understand the fargin table?

Total Comp – Cash = Long term comp = stock options

Stock options are granted at a strike price (either @ market or more favorable…) whenever the stock price dips below the strike price the option is worthless. Even when the options are in the money, they still have to be vested (1,3,5,etc… years, though the can also be vested immediately).

Basically, it is only a paper expense to the company, until the options are excersised.

If the company does not do well, the options granted, will not do well and Steve’s compensation will not be quite so stellar.

But, if the company does well…

2003-04-05 4:33 am

Jobs’ salary doesn’t seem that unreasonable. Tyco? Lucent? Sun? None of those companies are doing nearly as well as Apple at this point. Tyco might not recover. Lucent is on a slow road to recovery.

2003-04-05 5:12 am

Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer each got a salary of $547,500 for 2002, as well as a $205,810 bonus. Neither received any stock options in 2002.

No one in the past few years has messed up a company more in the past few years than he has. Sure Jobs has a big ego, but I think Eisner is even bigger.

2003-04-05 6:52 am

Jobs gets a dollar for every computer. Not a bad salary, and for sure will probably make him want to boost sales with products more people want.

2003-04-05 8:06 am

“We have yet to see the product of Apple’s 6 years of preperation for comeback. Its been building up until Apple can (finally) release first class hardware with its new first class OS. Steve used his skills to help recover Apple, and soon we will see those same skills in action to help build mare market share. The plan will debut and the end of this year and start materializing in 2004 ”

Don’t take this the wrong way, but isn’t that similiar to a detergent company saying “The new, and improved”, while the customer is wondering “So what did I previously buy?”

2003-04-05 8:20 am

$16 million would be enough for him too. For $100 millions a lot of wells could be build in dry areas of Africa (remember, half of the humans have no access to clean water!!!). Such salaries are perverse and ethically and morally not justifiable.

2003-04-05 9:58 am

The same thing happened in 2001, Fortune told that Steve Jobs got 872 million $. Here’s what Steve Jobs responded:

“In fact, [the Apple stock options] are worth zero,” Jobs says. In January 2000, Apple granted me an opportunity to purchase 20 million shares for $43.59 per share. Since then, Apple’s stock has declined (along with most high-tech stocks) and is now trading around $24 per share. So Apple’s current stock price will have to almost double before my options are worth a nickel.”

Jobs said that he’s sure the Fortune staff knows how stock options work and so “bent” the truth in order to sell magazines. However, if they really do think his penniless stock options are worth $872 million, Jobs offers to make them “the deal of a lifetime and sell them to you for just half that amount.”

2003-04-05 10:46 am

Hey, lets get back to the genenral Mac criticism and mix in a bit about that salary. Macs are overpriced and underpowered seemingly partly due to Apple blowing sugar up Steves a$$.

I used Macs for a long time and now use other operating systems on other platforms and *gasp* I get the job done without more trouble or time, amazing, ain’t it? Even cost me less than buying a Mac!

2003-04-05 10:51 am

“So yes, Jobs did some good job at Apple, but he costs way too much today. I am not sure if it is logical to keep him around with such a salary.”

Yeah… they should instead hire you right? Since you did turn Apple around and kept it profitable during most of your tenure as CEO. Oh, wait… you didn’t….

Don’t be an ass, javi. What are you, twelve? This person was making a decent observation. What were you doing, other than being juvenile? Jerkoff.

2003-04-05 12:11 pm

“We have yet to see the product of Apple’s 6 years of preperation for comeback. Its been building up until Apple can (finally) release first class hardware with its new first class OS.”

Give me a break. Apple hardware is made here in Taiwan by the very same companies by the very same people in the very same factories who also make (gasp!) PC hardware. Quanta and Hon Hai to name just two. Sorry to burst your bubble, but Macs are NOT made by elves living in the Magic Kingdom.

2003-04-05 1:38 pm

Thanks again, Eugenia. I will demand a $154.99 discount before I even consider buying a Mac. Yeah, I’ll give him a penny. Of course, knowing Steve as I do, he’ll simply take the $154.99 from someone poor hardworking Apple employee.

2003-04-05 2:29 pm

Don’t forget that Apple is a publicly traded company, so they have to worry about their stock price.

Investors are nervous creatures. Many of them don’t really understand computers, but they will have seen that Apple was doing well in its early days with Jobs, then Jobs left and things went very badly, then Jobs came back and Apple started doing well again. (I know this is a simplistic description, but whether through coincidence or ability, it seems that the most successful times in Apple’s history have been when Jobs was around).

So for a lot of investors Apple without Jobs is a far less attractive proposition than Apple with Jobs, so if Jobs leaves they will sell their stock, the price could plummet, and then Apple would be in all sorts of trouble.

2003-04-05 4:42 pm

These sorts of figures seem obscene to me. I can understand indulgence, but what does it take to get to the point where you can possibly burn more than $20 million in one year? That’s more than ten times what the average American makes in their lifetime. It seems that if he just took $2-3 million per year and then put the rest back into Apple and gave people a $50 discount and then poured the rest into advertising or R&D or whatever then they could be significantly more popular. Is it just me or do people in this day and age making more than the economy of most African nations per year seem utterly obscene? I get disgusted just thinking about it.

2003-04-05 4:47 pm

You should learn how to read. The article on apple.com says they sold 743,000 machines in ONE QUARTER, not all of 2002. As such, they probably sold closer to about 3 million machines in the whole year.

This brings the “Jobs tax” down to about $39.

2003-04-05 5:36 pm

that are still bashing Steve Jobs for his salary, I think you should read Morden’s response and maybe click on the link and read the article, it basically describes how worthless these stock options really are to him.

PC bashers and Mac bashers are just alike, I have no more respect for either of them. I own both a Mac and a PC and you couldn’t ask me to choose between them.

2003-04-05 5:52 pm

This has nothing to do with the Mac vs. PC debate, this has to do with the fact that this man is earning far more than is humanly necessary and it’s obscene that he’s earning this kind of money when his company appears to be just barely keeping afloat and has so much farther to go (5%? C’mon…).

2003-04-05 6:02 pm

I hate greedy cunts, though at least most of em moved to the ‘land of opportunity’ and will be nuked by terrorists after allowing jews to take over their government.

2003-04-05 6:15 pm

Jobbs is already very well off financially he most likely has $100 million in “cash” and much more in stock options and other investments. Does he really need a $116 million dollar salary? I’m not against Steve but executive salaries are way out of line. If he really wants to make an example of turning the company around, he should take a big paycut. $100 million in Apple’s coffers could help out a lot right now. At the least a $150 system price cut seems in order!

2003-04-05 6:16 pm

I would give all but $1 million to employees as $1 million dollar bonuses for their hard work. If you could give everyone in the company a 100/20,000 chance to win the lottery I bet they’d try real hard to make it to the top of the list.

Jobs didn’t do all the work, but he gets to take home all the cash. This is American Capitalism. Is this what we think is right? If he was a more generous person I bet Apple could do a lot better.

2003-04-05 6:33 pm

Warren Buffet is one of the finest CEOs around has a salary of $100,000 a year and he does just fine.

2003-04-05 6:40 pm

Just as the dotcom theftalon was all about greed, so are exec salaries at Apple and other tech companies.

The ratio between an average employee and the Steve Jobs compensation is so far out of whack that it makes a mockery of an enlightened economic system. Is tech a meritocracy anymore? Certainly not. Apple runs on the Sycophants of Steve ladder, not on any system based on objective merit.

Why does Steve even bother to call them employees anymore?

Apple is all about making a few people at the top very wealthy. They are not about changing the world or anything else their marketing lies tell the world. It is no wonder the market share is decling every day. Share is not critical to making Steve & his cronies richer than sin.

Go, Steve, go! You can catch Bill yet! Your slaves support you. Not out of love, but out of fear of your ego and your incredibly abrasive, demeaning, and harsh personality.

It will be a good laugh when you are still lording over your slaves — “I am your RULER! Surrender your life to me!” — while Apple has less than 1% of global market share. The world will be able to see you for the nasty greedy petty tyrant that you are.

2003-04-05 7:02 pm

If Jobs is that well liked by the investors why did no one invest in NeXT. Its not the CEO that makes investors turn their heads it profitability, products. The only reason why Apple did so well when Jobs came back wasnt Steve Jobs and Avie Tevanian it was the fact he used product design that no one else had ever done. If when Steve came back he kept producing boring beige boxes Apple would still be at the point it was in 1997 perhaps even worse, When Jobs came back he produced some great new designs, the OS was crap but the cases looked cool. But now Apples becoming unattractive to investors and users because what has Apple done that is new and fresh? Mac OS X can only carry them so far, when OS X hit the shelves, it said ” Look at me” but now I have noticed that the amount of Open Source developers that switched to OS X have either switched back or have gone with LinuxPPC, although you wouldnt believe that by reading any Apple press release. OS X carried them far but the momentum is slowing down, Apple will have to do something so shocking as to get it rolling again, thats why I think in WWDC you will see either Apple announcing some kind of partnership with AMD or an x86 version of Mac OS X. The company has long relied on shock effect to keep it going, switching to an industry standard such as the x86 processor will be a shock and since it will be taking on Microsoft for the desktop it will be much more attractive to Open Source developers because then they will not have to invest in an entirely new hardware platform. Just by going with a Power4 or 5 based Server or workstation will not produce the kind of shock effect that will keep Apple going because it is known that eventually they would go to Power4 or Power5.

2003-04-05 11:59 pm

“The company has long relied on shock effect to keep it going, switching to an industry standard such as the x86 processor will be a shock and since it will be taking on Microsoft for the desktop it will be much more attractive to Open Source developers because then they will not have to invest in an entirely new hardware platform. Just by going with a Power4 or 5 based Server or workstation will not produce the kind of shock effect that will keep Apple going because it is known that eventually they would go to Power4 or Power5.”

As I’m certain you’re aware. The OSS developers hasn’t traditionaly been Apple’s market. Do you see that trying to please that small market will in any way improve Apple’s lot in life? Also how will playing in Microsofts backyard be a wise thing? OSS succeeds in part because it doesn’t play by traditional rules. Apple may not have the same option.

Also the “eventually they may go to” argument is flawed. All consumer platforms are a mix of “shock and awe” and evolving ahead. Weither people move to the Apple platform is as similiar a question as “will people move to Linux?”, and the answer is as complicated.

2003-04-06 2:03 am

at least most of em moved to the ‘land of opportunity’ and will be nuked by terrorists after allowing jews to take over their government.

Please say this isn’t the most intelligent thing you have to say. If it is, I’m sorry for whatever country you’re from. Would it, perchance, be a country where many people with bad teeth are envious of Americans? Just wondering.

Now, back to the topic at hand: yes, Jobbs could very well be overpaid, but people whining their Marxist ideals are just arguing with the weather. Capitalism is here to stay, folks, whether you agree with it or not. And keep in mind that his stock options (right now) are basically swirling around the bowl. Also keep in mind that, while Apple’s market share has gone down, their number of total units sold has gone up…it’s just that way more people own computers now than in the mid-nineties. Don’t mistake me for a Jobbs apologetic, however; I just want to put things into perspective.

2003-04-06 6:46 pm

Jobs has done a good job at apple but that salary level runs contrary to the times. Steve is being a bit insensitive by cashing that in during the biggest tech down turn in probably 20 years. Silicon valley has not seen these kind of employment rates for a long time. Though mr. jobs is doing a good job, it might be time for him to practice some modesty.

2003-04-06 6:58 pm

latest market share figures, anyone?

Apple. Sink different.

2003-04-06 8:50 pm

“Jobs has done a good job at apple but that salary level runs contrary to the times. Steve is being a bit insensitive by cashing that in during the biggest tech down turn in probably 20 years. Silicon valley has not seen these kind of employment rates for a long time. Though mr. jobs is doing a good job, it might be time for him to practice some modesty.”

But he’s NOT cashing in, certainly not to the tune of 116 million, all but 2.3 million is stock options, which will be worthless if Apple is not successful a few years down the line when they mature. 2.3 million is still a nice bit of cash, but I suspect that Jobs could make a higher cash salary elsewhere, but he instead he takes the risk of stock options in the hope that the rewards will be worth it. In 2001 he was paid 43.5 million in cash… how many people complaining about how much he earns would agree to a 95% cut in their salary and the promise of a big payout IF things ever get better?

His stock options will only have value if the tech industry, and more importantly Apple, do well and the stock price rises… if that happens then the payback is his reward for sticking through the thin times as well as the thick.

2003-04-07 12:16 am

> In 2001 he was paid 43.5 million in cash…

Actually Steve Jobs has only been paid 1 $ every year since 1997, and he got a Gulfstream V (47 million $) and it’s taxes (43 million $ in total over many years).

And worthless (in the current economic situation) stock options.

—

Out of topic, but doesn’t people who are talking about x86 Macs know anything about Mac OS X? Classic wouldn’t work in a x86 prosesor, and neither would Carbon applications, and most applications are Carbon (Photoshop, Office, Flash, Final Cuts, …).

The original Rhapsody failed because companies like Adobe, Macromedia and Microsoft would not make “Yellow” (OpenStep/Cocoa) versions of their applications. That’s why Apple never shipped the Intel version of Rhapsody, nor the “Yellow Box” for Windows (and Mac OS, possibly Solaris and HP-UX like OpenStep).

2003-04-07 12:45 am

” As I’m certain you’re aware. The OSS developers hasn’t traditionaly been Apple’s market. Do you see that trying to please that small market will in any way improve Apple’s lot in life? Also how will playing in Microsofts backyard be a wise thing? OSS succeeds in part because it doesn’t play by traditional rules. Apple may not have the same option. ”

Well then why did Apple choose the Open Source route ? It wanted the developers because by going the open source route you have a wide range of talent and skill, Open Source doesnt hurt Apple it only helps to improve the companies offerings, of all the things I dislike about Apple I have always been supportive of the fact that they decided to attract open source developers to the platform even if it didnt work exctly like I think Dr. Tevanians plans hoped. Also for the x86 suggestion, most Open Source developers, not all but the majority, are college students or work in a feild that doesnt pay them alot of money. If Apple was to go x86 it would be easier for them to swallow $129.00 or even $200.00 then to swallow $2,000 or $3,000 dollars for an entirely different platform.

” Also the “eventually they may go to” argument is flawed. All consumer platforms are a mix of “shock and awe” and evolving ahead. Weither people move to the Apple platform is as similiar a question as “will people move to Linux?”, and the answer is as complicated. ”

I do not think it is flawed, because if you think about it going with a 64 bit system at this point in time would be the only thing ” Flawed”, I can tell you two comapnies that failed at this, Sun and SGI as you can see no one is really marketing a 64 bit desktop system because economically it is suicide, there are billions of 32 bit users out there at this point and time and there is no rational argument out there as to why go with a 64 bit system. Servers, yes desktops not really. As for will Apple move to x86 or will x86 move to Linux is an easy argument, x86 users out there outnumber PowerPC users always have, always will. People are getting very fed up with Microsofts price gouging and strong arm tactics, a major move will be made very soon and since Linux right now is the only viable other OS on the x86 world, it will be Linux, if Apple does a x86 version of Mac OS X at least it will be in the drawing. Either way wether it is Mac OS X or Linux, Microsofts days are numbered and limited, it may not be tommorrow it may not be in 2 years but in 5 years from now Microsoft will not be the majority player. My two Lincolns.

2003-04-07 12:49 am

“Actually Steve Jobs has only been paid 1 $ every year since 1997, and he got a Gulfstream V (47 million $) and it’s taxes (43 million $ in total over many years). ”

Ah, found it now, $1 salary, and 43.5 million in a “special executive bonus” in the form of a jet.